Creating Resilient River Systems by Mainstreaming and Upscaling Nature-based Solutions or ‘ResiRiver’ for short, is an EU Interreg project focusing on the creation of Resilient River Systems through the mainstreaming and upscaling of Nature-based Solutions (NbS). Today, most North-West European (NWE) river systems face significant challenges, largely resulting from past anthropogenic riverine alterations (regulations and interventions) which have greatly exacerbated the negative effects of climate change like flooding and drought. These changes also put additional pressures on existing land-use-claims, and other societal/economic interests like shipping, agriculture and water quality and cause continued biodiversity-loss. In recent years, NbS have emerged as a novel and sustainable approach in river management, cap able of mitigating these threats while also strengthening climate resilience. They fit well within the EU’s ‘Blue Economy’ ambition and provide undeniable benefits for both human well-being and biodiversity. However, the widespread integration (mainstreaming) and implementation (upscal ing) of NbS in riverine systems has yet to become common practice. The ResiRiver project there fore aims to accelerate the upscaling and mainstreaming of NbS through a curated partnership of full-scale North West Europe NbS projects by gathering, transferring, and synthesizing know ledge and experiences, whilst ensuring that this is done at all relevant partner/national/EU levels.

River managers today are faced with the challenge of adapting to climate change while also having to sustainably secure all important functions in a healthy river system for society. Nature-based Solutions (NbS) have proven themselves effective across a multitude of contexts; providing integrative approaches for river restoration, conservation and sustainable management, ensuring both climate change adaptation and contribute to climate change mitigation and biodiversity recovery for generations to come. NbS are multi-faceted and more importantly, they are effective when it comes to addressing complex societal challenges (e.g. reducing flood risk, increasing natural values and biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being), as they provide a novel, integrative and coherent approach. Despite the significant and rapidly growing base of scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of NbS in riverine systems management, the actual uptake and application of NbS on a larger (EU) scale is still in its early phase. From where we stand today, a major barrier to the wider uptake and application of NbS in riverine systems remains (a) our limited experience in scaling solutions beyond their local contexts (so called ‘Upscaling’), and (b) make Nbs as a standard work practice within water management organisations throughout North-West Europe (so called ‘Mainstreaming’). Also, our lack of standardised methods for quantitative assessment and monitoring of ecosystem services and benefits related to NbS hinders replication and application at a wider scale.

Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are actions that harness nature to help address major societal challenges. The assessment frameworks for NbS proposed in the literature differ in scope and intended use. In 2020, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) introduced their Global Standard for NbS as a framework that can be used by anyone working on different types of NbS. Since research on the applicability of the IUCN Standard remains limited, the aim of this paper is to analyse whether the IUCN Standard may be used as an overarching assessment framework for NbS in river flood management applications and to identify the main differences in content with other NbS-frameworks. This was achieved through a comparison with 29 assessment frameworks for NbS, that are applicable to physical interventions for riverine flood risk reduction. The comparisons showed that the IUCN Standard has the largest breadth in scope of application and may therefore be used as an overarching framework. In addition, we identified a distinction between frameworks for the assessment of project processes (process-oriented) and project results (results-oriented), where the IUCN Standard can be characterized as process-oriented. This implies that the IUCN Standard may be used to assess the processes (e.g. stakeholder engagement and adaptive management) of planned, ongoing or completed NbS projects for a wide variety of environmental contexts and societal challenges. This will help persuade policy makers to consider NbS as one of the solutions in flood management issues, next to or in combination with e.g. engineering solutions or changing land use. We also identified that, while the IUCN Standard is straightforward to use and incorporates stakeholder input, the environmental context specificity as well as guidance depth on resources for assessment can be improved.

Channel adjustment in engineered rivers is often associated with channel bed incision (e.g., Chowdhury et al., 2023, Czapiga et al., 2022a, 2022b, Ylla Arbós et al., 2021). Channel bed incision reduces the stability of in-river structures, exposes river-crossing cables and pipelines, and the spatial variability of channel bed incision due to less erodible reaches creates shipping bottlenecks. Various measures have been implemented to cope with these issues. They range from sediment nourishments to erosion control structures (e.g., Habersack and Piégay, 2007). Our objective is to assess the potential of floodplain lowering and sediment nourishments in mitigating large-scale channel bed incision in engineered rivers affected by climate change, considering a spatial scale of hundreds of kilometres. Our domain of interest is the Rhine River between Bonn, Germany, to Gorinchem, Netherlands. This reach has been extensively channelized during the 18th-20th centuries for improved navigation and flood protection (e.g., Ylla Arbós et al., 2021).

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) published their Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions (NbS) in an effort to further a common understanding and successful application of NbS. Our objective is to analyse the applicability of and considerations and advancements in using the IUCN Standard, as very few studies have examined and reflected on its actual application. As method, we applied the IUCN Standard to three case studies of river restoration projects with a focus on flood risk mitigation: (1) Eddleston Water Project, (2) “Room for the River” Deventer Project, and (3) Missouri River Levee Setback Project. Rather than evaluating the case studies itself, we evaluated the outcome to find the strong and weak points of the IUCN Standard. The gathered data (publicly accessible documents, conducted interviews with experts and stakeholders) was analysed and showed the role of the number of documents and interviews available. This determined the outcome of the IUCN assessment. The consultation of project experts has appeared to be an essential step in the data collection, while stakeholder interviews and field visits were less important, but did increase the degree of substantiation and the ease of data collection, respectively. Although restricted by a limited evaluation of flood risk mitigation studies, using the IUCN Standard for an ex-post assessment can provide credibility to project processes (e.g. stakeholder engagement and adaptive management), reveal project strengths and weaknesses, and provide opportunities for the comparison of projects. Hence, the IUCN Standard aptly evaluates process-based aspects of Nature-based Solutions for riverine flood risk mitigation.